The ethics of ethnographic methods in conflict zones
| DOI | 10.1177/0022343320971021 |
| Published date | 01 May 2021 |
| Date | 01 May 2021 |
| Author | Jana Krause |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
Articles
The ethics of ethnographic methods
in conflict zones
Jana Krause
Department of Political Science, University of Oslo
Abstract
This article examines the ethics of using ethnographic methods in contemporary conflict zones. Ethnographic
research is an embodied research practice of immersion within a field site whereby researchers use ethnographic
sensibility to study how people make sense of their world. Feminist, conflict and peacebuilding scholars who research
vulnerable populations and local dynamics especially value ethnographic approaches for their emphasis on contextual
understanding, human agency, egalitarian research relationships and researcher empathy. While immersion leads to
knowledge that can hardly be replaced by using more formal approaches, it also elicits ethical dilemmas. These arise
not only from the specific research context but also from who the researcher is and how they may navigate violent and
often misogynous settings. I argue that many dilemmas may and perhaps should not be overcome by researcher skill
and perseverance. Instead, ethical challenges may lead researchers to adopt limited and/or uneven immersion in their
field site, not as failed or flawed ethnography but as an ethical research strategy that incorporates ethnographic
sensibility to a varying extent. Examining why researchers may opt for limited and uneven immersion is important
because in conflict research, stereotypes of the intrepid (male) researcher with a neutral gaze still tend to mute open
discussions of how gender, race, ethnicity, nationality, class and other background factors inevitably shape immer-
sion. This article seeks to contribute to creating discursive space for these conversations, which are vital for researchers
to analyse, reflect and write from the position of a ‘vulnerable observer’ and incorporate greater transparency in the
discussion of research findings.
Keywords
conflict research, ethnographic methods, fieldwork, limited immersion, research ethics, transparency
Introduction
In political science, conflict research and peacebuilding
research, recent books and articles testify to a ‘resurgence’
of ethnographic methods (Simmons & Smith, 2019; see
also Autessere, 2014; Berenschot, 2011; Fujii, 2009;
Mazurana, Jacobsen & Gale, 2013; Macaspac, 2018;
Millar, 2018; Pachirat, 2017; Pearlman, 2015, 2017;
Wedeen, 2010; Wood, 2003, 2013; among others). Eth-
nographic research is commonly understood as immer-
sion in a field site, long-term engagement, and
participant observation, often combined with other
forms of more or less structured conversations and inter-
views (Bell, Caplan & Karim, 1993; Fujii, 2010; Mazur-
ana, Jacobsen & Gale, 2013; Millar, 2018; Schatz, 2009;
Wood, 2006). Researchers not only pay attention to
specific questions to be answered but also immerse them-
selves in the broader meaning-laden context of their
interlocutors (Schwedler, Simmons & Smith, forthcom-
ing). Immersion allows for developing ethnographic sen-
sibility beyond face-to-face encounters and interview
settings. It necessitates emotional engagement to glean
meanings that people attribute to their social and polit-
ical reality and to understand people’s narratives in the
context of their everyday lives (Yanow, 2006; Schatz,
2009). The length and depth of immersion for research
to qualify as ‘ethnographic’, and the extent to which the
researcher adopts an emic perspective of people’s own
Corresponding author:
jana.krause@stv.uio.no
Journal of Peace Research
2021, Vol. 58(3) 329–341
ªThe Author(s) 2021
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/0022343320971021
journals.sagepub.com/home/jpr
To continue reading
Request your trial